news Man Arrested for 14 Year Late VHS Rental

[Guest]

http://www.cnn.com/2016/03/25/entertainment/arrest-for-14-year-late-video/index.html?sr=twCNN032516arrest-for-14-year-late-video0757AMStoryLink&linkId=22677574

 

A man in North Carolina was arrested during a pull over to tell him his brake lights were out. Upon running his name they discovered he had a warrant out for an overdue rental from over 14 years ago. This honestly is a bunch of crap and honestly sounds like debt prisons, which have been outlawed in the US for centuries. This kind of crap was made illegal back during the revolution because farmers were told to produce more crops for the war effort but when the war ended they were left with crop they could not sell and then thrown in jail for debts where they could not pay them.

 

The idea of throwing people in jail over debt that is not due to a law violation (i.e. a fine you are obligated to pay) is stupid simply because people can't pay from prison.

 

This is definitely a really crappy thing, oh and the movie in question? Freddy Got Fingered.

[Gestum 2,493]

Well, technically he wasn't arrested because of the fines. He was arrested for not returning rented property.

[Guest]

Well, technically he wasn't arrested because of the fines. He was arrested for not returning rented property.

Property which has a value well below $30, which by law is not considered petty theft even.

[PiratePony 8,475]

 

 

oh and the movie in question? Freddy Got Fingered.

 

Are you sure that's not the reason he was arrested? 

[Gestum 2,493]

Property which has a value well below $30, which by law is not considered petty theft even.

Well, it is still illegal to not return it under North Carolina law.

[Guest]

Well, it is still illegal to not return it under North Carolina law.

 

I get that, and I'm not contesting that. But 14 years? I mean the limitations of many crimes is 10 years. I'm sorry but I don't think it's reasonable to allow people to keep a warrant out for 14 years for an un-returned VHS. In fact for debts that are larger (because essentially he has a debt to the video store because at this point they probably want him to replace the video) there are laws in place that prevent companies from collecting or trying to collect after a period of time. If the video store has not attempted to contact him or make some kind of honest effort to collect this debt in 14 years (and I am pretty confident they have not, this warrant was issued in 2002, which means they didn't press the matter) then you are entitled to nothing. The law is pretty clear that you can't just forget about a debt/loan for so long and just decide later that you want it if you made no effort to collect.

 

For many states it's about 9 years. I recall a company attempted to collect a debt from my mother from 1997 in 2014. They wanted over $9,000 for some crap, and never contacted her before then. They ended up with nothing because legally she was not obligated to pay them anything because they waited so long.

 

In the case of this video, the amount is so low, and the warrant is so old that an arrest should not have happened. This is literally just people taking the law too literally and not using common sense. This isn't "justice" or "following the rules" it's people being stupid and wasting people's time. This man is not a criminal, and his "crime" is easily accidental. If this happened to me I would be pissed because being arrested even for something so minor can damage you. For example: you can't even get into the military now if you have ANY arrests on your record unless you jump through hoops. It would make getting into the army significantly harder for me. And if you are in the army you could risk being kicked out even for something so minimal. You will have to put you were arrested on some job applications which could cost you the job, and background checks will always show you were arrested and you'll have to have that conversation at a lot of job interviews and many jobs won't even hire you because they just see "arrested" and don't care what for because of the wonderful prejudice world we live in.

 

People do not consider what an arrest can do to you even for something so minor. Yeah good chance it won't affect him at all, but it can cause negative impact. And over what? A VHS? I am pretty confident that the video store does not need a replacement VHS.

 

This is literally just the police acting too literal and not using common sense. A 14 year old movie being overdue is not a reason to arrest a man, if anything they should have just given him the video store name and told him to go talk to them because chances are, it was an honest mistake. A $20 movie is not even petty theft and you would not have been arrested for that had it been only a year old anyways.

[That Guy with the CMB 5,873]

Meanwhile, everywhere else

[Kyoshi Frost Wolf 41,632]

The law is working beautifully it would seem. Definitely keeping crime at bay and bringing peace to the land. 

 

 

 

This story makes me feel rather sarcastic. 

[Courageous Thunder Dash 7,824]

...I'll let Twilight sum this up...

 

[ManaMinori 4,145]

http://www.cnn.com/2016/03/25/entertainment/arrest-for-14-year-late-video/index.html?sr=twCNN032516arrest-for-14-year-late-video0757AMStoryLink&linkId=22677574

 

A man in North Carolina was arrested during a pull over to tell him his brake lights were out. Upon running his name they discovered he had a warrant out for an overdue rental from over 14 years ago. This honestly is a bunch of crap and honestly sounds like debt prisons, which have been outlawed in the US for centuries. This kind of crap was made illegal back during the revolution because farmers were told to produce more crops for the war effort but when the war ended they were left with crop they could not sell and then thrown in jail for debts where they could not pay them.

 

The idea of throwing people in jail over debt that is not due to a law violation (i.e. a fine you are obligated to pay) is stupid simply because people can't pay from prison.

 

This is definitely a really crappy thing, oh and the movie in question? Freddy Got Fingered.

let's not jail tax evaders, by that logic

[Simon 4,557]

 

 

I get that, and I'm not contesting that. But 14 years? I mean the limitations of many crimes is 10 years.

 

That's not how statutes of limitations work. Statutes of limitations are about setting a deadline for the government to discover who committed a crime, not about telling criminals how long they need to run for. The second a warrant was issues within the statute of limitations, that limit was satisfied. Otherwise, a statute of limitations would be encouraging people to run from the police which isn't something anybody wants.

 

As for why he was arrested, that's because there was a warrant. Any time you get pulled over or have police contact, they do a warrant check. If you have unpaid parking tickets, missed court appearances, outstanding criminal warrants, or anything else of that nature, they see it and have to pull you in. The officers at the scene had absolutely no choice but to arrest him, not arresting when there's an open warrant, whether the crime is murder or a speeding ticket, would mean the end of their careers. It's not their choice to make if the law is too silly to enforce, we have a separation of powers for a reason. Legislative branch makes the law, executive enforces it, judiciary determines guilt and sentencing, that's our system.

 

The officers here were also about as nice as they could possibly be... they let him go and drop kids off at school after discovering the warrant... that's pretty darn nice considering him not turning himself in later could have meant the end of the officer's careers for not bringing him in initially.

 

And as people pointed out, fines are not a crime, theft is. A VHS might seem insignificant, but trust me when I say there are far smaller thefts that are prosecuted every day. People don't get a free pass because it's a small dollar amount. The person walking into Walmart and stealing a pack of gum is just as guilty of a crime as the person stealing a car, the only impact amount has is on the appropriate sentence.

 

That being said, nobody is going to jail over this. Non-violent simple misdemeanors very, very rarely result in jail sentences, and where they do, it's because the person is on probation or parole for something more serious, or because they have a thousand past offenses and that's the only way to deal with them. Assuming the case isn't dismissed since most of the store employees and witnesses are long gone and it'd be difficult to prosecute, he'll get a small fine and it'll be done with.

 

Does stuff like this suck? Sure. Is it a waste of resources? Probably. But ultimately, the system has a certain degree of automation to it and it just worked against this man. Changing any aspect of the process on how this was handled would have major implications for much more serious offenses. These types of silly cases end up working themselves out more often than not. Ultimately though, the easiest way to keep yourself from getting arrested for a stupid 14 year old crime, is to not commit the crime in the first place. I can promise you those officers weren't thrilled about wasting their time over this either, but nobody involved had a choice.

[Zyrael 1,471]

Well, let's hope he enjoyed the movie at least

[LeonShi500 155]

Well, let's hope he enjoyed the movie at least

I doubt it. The movie was very mediocre. 

[Zyrael 1,471]

I doubt it. The movie was very mediocre. 

 

Oh. Well, if it was that bad, his punishment should have been owning it for 14 years

[LeonShi500 155]

But really, Simon described the situation the best. Even if the system was working here the best way that it could while still being in favor of the man in question here, the entire case is still stupid from a logical and moral perspective. 

[Guest]

let's not jail tax evaders, by that logic

Tax evasion =/= not returning a VHS from 14 years ago.

 

 

 

That's not how statutes of limitations work. Statutes of limitations are about setting a deadline for the government to discover who committed a crime, not about telling criminals how long they need to run for. The second a warrant was issues within the statute of limitations, that limit was satisfied. Otherwise, a statute of limitations would be encouraging people to run from the police which isn't something anybody wants.

 

As for why he was arrested, that's because there was a warrant. Any time you get pulled over or have police contact, they do a warrant check. If you have unpaid parking tickets, missed court appearances, outstanding criminal warrants, or anything else of that nature, they see it and have to pull you in. The officers at the scene had absolutely no choice but to arrest him, not arresting when there's an open warrant, whether the crime is murder or a speeding ticket, would mean the end of their careers. It's not their choice to make if the law is too silly to enforce, we have a separation of powers for a reason. Legislative branch makes the law, executive enforces it, judiciary determines guilt and sentencing, that's our system.

 

The officers here were also about as nice as they could possibly be... they let him go and drop kids off at school after discovering the warrant... that's pretty darn nice considering him not turning himself in later could have meant the end of the officer's careers for not bringing him in initially.

 

And as people pointed out, fines are not a crime, theft is. A VHS might seem insignificant, but trust me when I say there are far smaller thefts that are prosecuted every day. People don't get a free pass because it's a small dollar amount. The person walking into Walmart and stealing a pack of gum is just as guilty of a crime as the person stealing a car, the only impact amount has is on the appropriate sentence.

 

That being said, nobody is going to jail over this. Non-violent simple misdemeanors very, very rarely result in jail sentences, and where they do, it's because the person is on probation or parole for something more serious, or because they have a thousand past offenses and that's the only way to deal with them. Assuming the case isn't dismissed since most of the store employees and witnesses are long gone and it'd be difficult to prosecute, he'll get a small fine and it'll be done with.

 

Does stuff like this suck? Sure. Is it a waste of resources? Probably. But ultimately, the system has a certain degree of automation to it and it just worked against this man. Changing any aspect of the process on how this was handled would have major implications for much more serious offenses. These types of silly cases end up working themselves out more often than not. Ultimately though, the easiest way to keep yourself from getting arrested for a stupid 14 year old crime, is to not commit the crime in the first place. I can promise you those officers weren't thrilled about wasting their time over this either, but nobody involved had a choice.

 

 

The issue I have is that this can VERY EASILY be a mistake, not an intentional theft. 14 years ago, and this is a HUGE waste of resources because we focus on automating a system and telling people they are not allowed to make a judgment call and say "fuck it" when it would otherwise be appropriate.

 

My point being that this is insanely stupid and a sign that perhaps automating the system is not always a good thing. I don't think anyone is contesting that stealing is bad, but the law should punish based upon intent, not be an end-all-be-all. In this case it's pretty obvious that the intent could have been strictly accidental and there should be things in place to where we don't need to waste our resources chasing after something so stupid and pointless. Now if he had legitimately stolen from the VHS store intentionally and willfully that would be a different story, but we're talking about an honest mistake.

 

Law should not work so flat as to be like "okay you did this, no exceptions, CRIME."

[Grepper 3,192]

I wonder why the man never returned the movie. Did he forget about it, lose it or break it? Or did he intentionally keep it?

[Simon 4,557]

The issue I have is that this can VERY EASILY be a mistake, not an intentional theft. 14 years ago, and this is a HUGE waste of resources because we focus on automating a system and telling people they are not allowed to make a judgment call and say "fuck it" when it would otherwise be appropriate.

 

Issue is that police don't have the resources on the street to be judge, jury and legislator. If it was a mistake and there's not evidence to support the charges that were filed 14 years earlier, then the case is going to get dismissed. But the second police are given the authority to decide which wanted people they arrest and which they don't is going to be the destruction of the system. That puts way too much power in the hands of police.

 

And the resources wasted by giving police discretion to make decisions on warrants would waste far more resources then enforcing them. As this case here demonstrates quite nicely, warrants don't go away until they're answered. So while this police officer may have decided to ignore it if given the discretion, that's going to mean in a year when he gets another traffic ticket, another officer has to make that decision. And that's going to happen again and again until one of them decides it's worth the trip to the jail. It's going to be a massive dump of resources, and is just going to result in even more ludicrous delays then this case already had.

 

The only way to really save resources is if police were actually given the authority to dismiss warrants, which would be an abhorrent destruction of justice. That would mean any officer on the street could get their buddy off of a crime by clicking the delete button next to there warrant. Not to mention the complete destruction of the separation of powers.

 

Ultimately, there is no perfect system. No matter how things are set up, there's going to be a not so ideal outcome. I'd personally rather have that be inconveniencing someone and making them show up to court for a slightly silly case then the severe risks of systematic abuse that could result from the alternatives.

 

And I'm not even mentioning the fact that the size of a charge isn't necessarily indicative of the size of the crime... remember, half the mafia was brought down for tax evasion.

[Trixie Heartstrings 434]

I think a fine is reasonable, but I don't think he should've been arrested. Tbh, I was not surprised to hear that the place he rented it from was closed, since video stores are now a rarity . I haven't seen Freddy Got Fingered, but I've seen reviews of it, and clips of it, and from what I've seen, my reaction was just "what the fuck am I watching!?" Regardless, I think the punishment was harsh. And if what I heard is true, even the police officer was like, "I can't believe I have a warrant for this." If they are going to punish him for what he did, like I said earlier, a fine makes sense, but jail doesn't.

[EpicEnergy 23,221]

This is ridiculous, I don't see the logic behind it.

[Splashee 28,566]

Great news story, that's what I am thinking!

 

Also, VHS are worth so much after 14 years of new technology.

[ggg-2 3,553]

I never returned Super Mario Galaxy to Blockbuster but that was only because the store went out of business by the due date.

[CypherHoof 26,483]

I never had SMG - I should try getting it running on dolphin, one of these days.

(also, isn't the VHS thing part of the plot for Combat Butler?)

[Splashee 28,566]

1 hour ago, ggg-2 said:

I never returned Super Mario Galaxy to Blockbuster but that was only because the store went out of business by the due date.

Omg what will happen? That makes you part of Blockbuster property... Yea, you know who is there to collect (FBI or whatever owns Blockbuster nowadays)

[ZiggWheelsManning 10,717]

The guy could have turned himself in, only for the police to laugh it off because VHS tapes are worthless